What this heading covers
This is the family where the expected result is the evidence. Without a recorded expectation for each case, a pass is an opinion. The draft puts precision into the definition of the subcharacteristic, so a result that is right to two decimal places when the task needs four is not fully correct. The measure should carry the case population and the definition of correct that was used, and it should distinguish a wrong result from a result that could not be produced at all.
Record position: family 2 of 40 in clause 6, under 6.2 Functional suitability, which carries 3 families. It is one of the 40 families a programme has to map its measures to, and its elements are listed below. The heading is 6.2.3 in the public contents; the text behind it is not public.
How a measure for this family is built
Combine the count of results judged correct with the count of results examined, and state the rule that decided correctness. If precision matters, the rule has to name the required precision and the tolerance. Two teams can run the same cases and get different measures if their correctness rules differ, which is why the rule belongs in the definition.
Our worked formula
Results judged correct divided by results examined, with the correctness rule and the precision stated.
Measure elements that can feed it
Number of test cases, Number of results, Number of failures
Chosen by us from the thirty-one quality measure elements named in Annex B. The draft does not publish which elements feed functional correctness, so the choice above is a worked example, not the draft's assignment.
What to put in place before publication
- Record the expected result before the case is run, not after.
- Write the correctness rule, including the precision and the tolerance, into the measure definition.
Evidence to keep
| Kind | What it looks like |
|---|---|
| Expectation | A recorded expected result and precision for every case in the population |
| Judgement | The pass or fail decision with the reviewer and the date |
The test a reviewer asks
- Is there an expected result on record for every case counted?
- Can a second reviewer reach the same judgement from the same evidence?
Two questions to ask
- Where is the expected result recorded for each case counted as correct?
- What precision did the correctness rule require, and what tolerance did it allow?
Where teams usually fall short
- Correctness judged by the absence of a complaint rather than by a comparison with an expectation.
What the number cannot tell you
It cannot tell you whether the expected results were right. A wrong expectation makes a correct product look broken, and the measure inherits that error.
What happens next
Correctness is not usefulness. Read functional appropriateness for the question the product answers in practice.
Source
ISO Online Browsing Platform, free preview of ISO/IEC DIS 25000-23.2 https://www.iso.org/obp/ui#iso:std:iso-iec:25000:-23:dis:ed-1:v2:en read 22 October 2026
ISO/IEC 25010:2023, Product quality model https://www.iso.org/standard/78176.html read 22 October 2026
ISO/IEC 25023:2016, Measurement of system and software product quality https://www.iso.org/standard/35747.html read 22 October 2026